Is Trump embracing aggressive withdrawal?

[Ragnarök_62]

(04-03-2017, 11:09 AM)X_4AD_84 Wrote:

(04-01-2017, 07:52 PM)Ragnarök_62 Wrote: Like the title sez, the US spends way too much on the MIC.



Looking at this pic, I advocate cutting the MIC spending by 2/3's.   That's about 400 million that can be put to way better use.

Source: https://www.datashown.com/blog/2017/3/1/...se-budgets.

Also, it appears there's no more room in the inn.  The US also has way too many people. Either we control our population or reality will, via peak oil and global warming.



Source: https://static1.squarespace.com/static/5...n-size.png

That means China is outspending us, in real terms (e.g. the China price). Russia's close.

1. Like I said before, man, that means some sort of nationalization is in order. The private sector paradigm costs too much.

2. The chart above is about population. I was referencing a 2T meme of population overshoot and the need to control population and stop this nonsense about "we need immigrants."  No! we don't need anymore people. We must collectively accept the fact we need to decrease the US population to account for the affects of global warming/climate change. Population overshoot is not sustainable and at some point will reverse, whether we like it or not. Mother Nature is gonna spank our collective asses with disease/famine/war if we don't actively choose to limit / decrease our unsustainable population. Obviously , I choose the voluntary measure of first shutting down immigration and also add incentives to decrease the birth rate.  Rags is a true child of the 1960's and I do think that Ehrlich is in the long run correct. The ongoing population explosion will ruin the earth first and the grim reaper will be unleashed upon mankind.